Horizon Security Services Ltd v Ndeze & Anor (Transfer of Undertakings : Service Provision Change) [2014] UKEAT 0071_14_1905 (19 May 2014)

There was no continuity of client between PCS and Horizon as PCS contracted with Workspace Plc and Horizon with London Borough of Waltham Forest; thus, there was no service provision change under TUPE 2006 reg 3(1)(b) and the claimant's employment did not transfer to Horizon.

Citation: [2014] UKEAT 0071_14_1905
Parties: Appellant: Horizon; Second Respondent: PCS; Claimant: Claimant; Client: London Borough of Waltham Forest; Client: Workspace Plc
Jurisdiction: United Kingdom
Judgment Date: 19 May 2014
Procedural Posture: Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment
Outcome: Appeal allowed
Legal Topics: Transfer of Undertakings, TUPE 2006, Service Provision Change, Continuity of Client, Short Term Duration Task

Employment Law Transfer of Undertakings TUPE 2006 Service Provision Change Continuity of Client Short Term Duration Task

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2

Parties

Horizon

Appellant

PCS

Second Respondent

Claimant

London Borough of Waltham Forest

Client

Workspace Plc

Client

Procedural Posture

Employment Appeal / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether there was continuity of client for the purposes of TUPE 2006 reg 3(1)(b)
2 Whether the task was of short-term duration under TUPE 2006 reg 3(3)

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

The decision of the Employment Tribunal is quashed.
A finding is substituted that the Claimant’s employment did not transfer to the Second Respondent (Horizon).